Mr. Tony Donohoe:

I will comment in the first instance on Deputy Jan O'Sullivan's comments on the school league tables. I agree with her and her suggestion is worth pursuing. They are such a crude measure of achievement and I am not simply talking about it in terms of apprenticeships. There are many aspects to the education experience and the development of the young person that go well beyond the CAO points he or she achieves. No metric is coming to mind at the moment, but I definitely think it is worth pursuing as an idea.

We have spoken about status a number of times today. If some of the companies on Mr. Davitt's board, which are the top global companies in the world, are prepared to offer apprenticeships, those apprenticeships will have status. These companies have serious brand power and they believe it is the thing to do. In the pharmaceutical sector we have seen some household names taking on apprentices. However, other things also need to happen, including in the area of marketing. We can only do so much, but if we target the companies and get them to offer apprenticeships, it would be a good use of time and resources.

I do not believe full employment will have a serious adverse impact. The registrations for traditional apprenticeships, predominately in the construction sector, are ahead of target. I noticed today that the CSO figures show a 3% increase in overall employment from quarter 3 of 2017 to quarter 3 of this year. Most of those jobs were in the construction sector and they are obviously needed. That industry is moving in the right direction. Our main blockage is in the area of new apprenticeships, which is probably not a surprise because the construction sector, for the past 40 or 50 years, has been using apprenticeships. They are part of its culture and way of doing business. We are not breaking new ground in that area, whereas we are with the new apprenticeships.

On the consolidation of the legislation and the idea of a stand-alone agency, it must be said that there have been process delays in approving and rolling out these apprenticeships. When the first call was made in 2015 many companies expressed enthusiasm and there was energy around the proposal. Three years down the line, some of these companies are still waiting. In terms of amendments to the legislation, as I said, it is not about the contracts of apprenticeship in terms of protections for the apprentice and the responsibilities of employers. That is fine and I would not change a word of that. It is about registering companies and improving industrial sectors. The people in the sector have pushed this to its boundary. For example, there is a requirement that the SOLAS board approve a new industrial sector. When it was asked to do so, it put the approval through in jig time. While this requirement has not been an impediment, it should not be in place.

Last week, the committee heard the chair of a stand-alone agency called Skillnet talk about what it is doing in terms of upskilling. It is a different product because Skillnet deals with 15,000 companies and has 50,000 employees taking part in its programmes. Many of them are shorter programmes or interventions, but it has to meet its metrics. It is a very efficient system. It could be wrapped into an existing agency or a separate agency could be created. I am always loath to suggest the creation of another quango, but we probably need a dedicated service for this.

Apprenticeships are positioned along the fault line of further education and higher education. We still have an education system that operates in a silo. We talk about progression and in reality there is some progression. While we are getting better, apprenticeships still tend to travel on a parallel track. The advanced apprenticeships are funded by the HEA, while SOLAS is funding apprenticeships up to level 6. There are disconnections there.

There is a significant amount of money available for apprenticeships. This year, some €120 million has been allocated to them, of which, incidentally, only €13 million is for the new apprenticeships we spent such a long time discussing. I would prefer to see a single agency managing all of that and promoting apprenticeships. This was alluded to in the original apprenticeship review group, which spoke about plural arrangements. We are probably approaching the time when such an agency has to be set up.

In terms of advanced apprenticeships, I am often accused of aiding the capture of apprenticeships by higher education because I talk so much about advanced apprenticeships and the requirement for degree apprenticeships and master's apprenticeships. We are even developing a PhD apprenticeship at the moment. I do not believe there will be huge number of those apprenticeships on offer, but the fact that they exist sends out an important message. I do not think that will be the educational experience for everybody, but the progression opportunity has to be provided. That is how we address the issue of status. A person starting at a level 5 or level 6 may not want to go to degree or master's level, but the fact that the progression route is available addresses much of the status challenge we have.